Researchers planning to "Start Over" the Internet?

[The Good]

I don't know where to really put this thread, but I thought it might belong here the most...

Here is the Link to the shocking story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/...the_internet_8


Only one Smiley describes this story:

[Town Watch]

Hehe strange, I read Dan Brown's Digital Fortress just last weekend.
Quis Custodiet Custodes Ipsos

[Anachronist]

Now this cant be good.

[Knasp]

Don't worry, I don't think they'll pull the plug on the old internet.

[Spiff]

No one can delete anything beyond what they own - though setting up a cleaner, better controlled 'parallel internet' probably isnt a bad idea

[VALIS]

Does that mean that everything now existing on the internet now will be deleted and we will have to start all over?

[Darkragnar]

aye me nither , even if they did it would be to better the system and address key problems with it.

Edit:Aye , everything, but with all these people hooked to the internet starting up again wont that big of a deal.

The only problem i think is the billions of dollers the coorporations spent on ze internet would have gone to waste.

[Erik]

Scientist: Hi.
Politician: Hi.
Scientist: I need to re-make the internet or it will crash
Politician: Really?
Scientist: Yeah.
Politician: Oh.
Scientists: It's going to cost you, though.
Politician: Cost me? how much.
Scientist: 350.
Politician: $350 USD?
Scientist: no, $350 million USD
Politician: I don't know...
Scientist: Dude! I need $350 million OR THE INTERNET WILL CRASH!!!
Politicians: Oh, yeah, OK, I understand, makes perfect sense, yeah, here: take my money.
Scientist: Great, I'll report back to you in 20 years
Politician:

Translation:
God, I love it when computer science and big money politics mix.
I wonder if they used the "The internet is a series of tubes, we need to turn it into a dump truck" line again, classic.

[Niles Crane]

But where will all my posts go?

It won't be like the 90s though, when the internet was still fairly quiet and nice.

[Scar Face]

It will never happen, its simply irritating. Irritating that idiots want to close it down, and irritating that people actually see this as a news worthy development, that merits spreading it to other sites. Its a bunch of crap from Fanatics, your not suppose to take them seriously, your suppose to shake your head and sigh.

[Erik]

OK, just to clarify:

-They do not want to close down the (existing) internet.
-They do not want to remove existing websites/data.

They just want to replace the old internet protocols with new ones. (ie: how the internet works on a ground level).
And if they ever do it I'm sure they will do it in such a way that all existing software will still work.
As an end user you'll probably not even notice the transition.

[DarkKnight]

Why is everyone freaking out? They aren't going to pull the plug on "this" internet. They are planning on making a new network then if that is successful, transition over from this network to that network. I would assume that most of the sites currently on the internet would be present on the new network provided that the host takes the effort to upload the site data.

This is a very good thing. By the sounds of it they are planning on making the internet much more secure. They will build in devices to prevent things such as virus's, spam, and hacking.

The only think I fear is that if this is being primarily funded by the U.S. Government that they will also implement mechanisms that are an invasion of our privacy.

[Princeps]

I smell an attempt to seize control of the net by corporations and governments.

[LoZz]

I don't know where to really put this thread, but I thought it might belong here the most...

Here is the Link to the shocking story: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/...the_internet_8


Only one Smiley describes this story:

despite what you some may think this is a good thing.


the problem with the net as we know it is it's larger then it was intended to be, thier are not enough IP's on the planet for everyone to have a static IP this is why you tend to find your IP adresess changes now and again (or so i understand it)


Some people have allready talked about just making ip adresses longer, which would not require the whole thing to be wiped. while others say start again with a clean slate.


ether way something has to be done

[Erik]

the problem with the net as we know it is it's larger then it was intended to be, thier are not enough IP's on the planet for everyone to have a static IP this is why you tend to find your IP adresess changes now and again (or so i understand it)

Some people have allready talked about just making ip adresses longer, which would not require the whole thing to be wiped. while others say start again with a clean slate.

ether way something has to be done

The lack of possible IP addresses (currently 4 billion) is just a minor problem.
There are far more and better reasons why a complete overhaul of the internet could be desirable.

I just think it's not something government should get involved in.
Politicians are completely clueless about how the internet works.
Whenever a government gets actively involved in IT projects things always end up costing way too much and being a complete mess.

[LoZz]

The lack of possible IP addresses (currently 4 billion) is just a minor problem.
There are far more and better reasons why a complete overhaul of the internet could be desirable.

I just think it's not something government should get involved in.
Politicians are completely clueless about how the internet works.
Whenever a government gets actively involved in IT projects things always end up costing way too much and being a complete mess.

true - it would bring some benifits,

with the right procedures in place you could have a real fighting chance against pedofiles and parents could have real access and protection over their kids online activites.

though the same thing could happen to those of us who get our music and films for free because we refuse to play stupidly priced movie tickets (7 pounds my local cinema, thats 14 dollers)

[Darkragnar]

The lack of possible IP addresses (currently 4 billion) is just a minor problem.
There are far more and better reasons why a complete overhaul of the internet could be desirable.

I just think it's not something government should get involved in.
Politicians are completely clueless about how the internet works.
Whenever a government gets actively involved in IT projects things always end up costing way too much and being a complete mess.

isnt that true for pretty much everything ? so why make a excerption in the case of the internet?

[Erik]

isnt that true for pretty much everything ? so why make a excerption in the case of the internet?

No, most politicians have at least some knowledge about the field they are working in.

For example:
Our minister of finance has a degree in economics.
Our minister of justice has a degree in law.
Our minister of education used to be a teacher himself.

But not that many politicians have a degree in computer science.

Thank you, Simetrical, I'm glad its in the right place now.

No, it's in the wrong place because this is more about the social consequences than about the technological questions.

Thats right, More porn!

No, not more porn, better porn.
There is way too much crappy porn already.

[Simetrical]

My main issue with this is if the goverment become involved we will lose our privacy, the best thing about the internet is the anonymity it provides. It gives people a place to discuss topics that normally would be considered immoral to talk about in public with no repurcussions from the law. It's the only palce where true freedom of speach really exists.

If you remove peoples privacy the number one thing imho the internet stands for is lost.

But nobody's talking about outlawing the old protocols. You could still use them, presumably, or proprietary protocols that give you the desired level of privacy.

No, most politicians have at least some knowledge about the field they are working in.

For example:
Our minister of finance has a degree in economics.
Our minister of justice has a degree in law.
Our minister of education used to be a teacher himself.

But not that many politicians have a degree in computer science.

An interesting point. But we don't have many ministers of the Internet or whatnot, do we?

No, it's in the wrong place because this is more about the social consequences than about the technological questions.

You can't discuss any consequences unless you know what's being proposed.

[imb39]

Can you imagine the trauma caused when they switched to the internal combustion engine...?